apostrophe â(TM) ' dash â', â", â", â ellipsis â¦,... guillemets   quotation marks ( â â(TM), âoe â ) slash/stroke ( / )
And of course, I have to add enough text here to avoid the lameness filter, which said "Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters. " So if I were to write a few lines about the wonders of how Slashdot does not yet support UTF-8 (still), except on slashdot.jp, it should let me post this without problems. Of course, it will take a lot of text to that.
In the famous words of my high school french teacher, "repetez s'il vous plait" (without all the "special" characters)
And of course, I have to add enough text here to avoid the lameness filter, which said "Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters. " So if I were to write a few lines about the wonders of how Slashdot does not yet support UTF-8 (still), except on slashdot.jp, it should let me post this without problems. Of course, it will take a lot of text to that.
Yup, openness and transparency. That's the CIA's motto. "No, we don't know anything about that". If you can't trust them to tell everyone the whole truth, who can you trust?
There isn't one. Well, there used to be one, but it was removed when it was shown to be futile. Apparently there is a peer process that frequently has severe conflicts with it, and then the child processes are a nightmare.
Due to this, the man page was removed, and users with longterm experience usually suggest against ever using it. Failure to heed their warnings usually result in comments such as "man, I told you so".
The first bug report with the process dates back from approximately 4000 B.C.E., and is still marked as "pending". I expect it won't be resolved until shortly after DNF is released.:)
... and FCRA... and several other very strict laws, depending on the industry. Does it have personal data (name, address, phone number, DOB, SSN, CC#, medical history, etc)? It's probably suppose to be kept in a secure environment, without ever going to untrusted 3rd parties. Depending on the industry, it could just involve "do the right thing", or go as far as quarterly 3rd party security audits that can shut you down until you're in compliance.
Re:Dramatic effect and scientific precision
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
That explains why this company is becoming the worlds leading producer in drinking water.
Re:Dramatic effect and scientific precision
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
Sounds like you either don't want to or haven't learn to play the game.
I'm far from an expert in the wonderful world of agriculture. I do know there are huge subsidies paid out to farmers. That is very hit and miss though. Some people make a fortune, and you're just a single farmer, or a small farm family, you probably don't.
I was curious one day about the guy who owned our office building. The building management complained to me (I just worked for one of the tenants) that the owner was "rich", but was too cheap to maintain the building properly. That ranged from plumbing that didn't work, to elevators that frequently got stuck, and alarm systems that would falsely trigger on a fairly regular basis. That man knows the system. He lives in an urban area, with the nearest farm land larger than 5 acres, about 50 miles away. From 2003 to 2005, he collected $3,217,158 in farm subsidies from the government. He's never worked a day in his life on a farm. That's enough information, if you want to Google around for more information on him, but you won't like what you find. Rich people make a fortune on plans that were *SUPPOSE* to help small farmers. Wouldn't a few hundred thousand in gov't subsidies help your farm? You'll have a hard time getting it, because rich non-farm people are collecting that money for you. They're also the same asses that shuffle their money around in such a way to make themselves look "poor" when tax time comes.
It's somewhat satisfying that when I searched for his name, a Feb 2011 news story mentioned that approximately 4,000 head of Bison were seized by the state from one of "his" ranches. The purpose of the ranches? To provide rich people a way to "hunt" them. Hunting isn't exactly the right term, since customers would be shuttled out by truck to were the Bison were feeding, so they could shoot at them. The thrill of the hunt shouldn't be in the comfort of a luxury SUV.
Re:Dramatic effect and scientific precision
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
In recent times, potatoes have been demonized by pop/quackery diets. The simple fact is, potatoes are an excellent food when prepared properly.
I think the part that you missed is that modern society has learned to serve potatoes with something else, or in may cases a whole lot of something else.
I take a little butter with my baked potato. I get strange reactions in restaurants when I don't want to drench it in sour cream, cheese, bacon, chives, etc. It's a perfectly good food. Why do we have to screw it up so bad?
The same is with salads. I eat mine with no dressing. A plate of raw vegetables tastes great. Why do I have to drown it in something else. I've had to send salads back 2 or 3 times, because they don't quite get "no dressing". No, not house dressing. No, not oil and vinegar. No, just the salad, dammit.
The same has gone for my steaks. I like rare steak. Like, warm enough in the middle to kill off germs. I'll be asked several times if I want whatever topping. No, I don't want butter, corn syrup laced BBQ sauce, or anything else on it. Just meat, that I can cut and eat.
Adding onto perfectly healthy foods with so many unhealthy additives has become deeply ingrained in our society. No one eats just a potato, vegetables, or meat. Well, except for a few people like me. I ordered the food to taste the food, not whatever dressing someone else wanted on it.
I do drink a lot of soda, which I plan on resolving again. When I stopped drinking soda before, I lost weight, gained muscle, and felt better. One car accident and a year of rehab with prescription drug induced confusion helped guide me back to consumerism (and a lifetime of pain). While I wasn't drinking soda, I found it very difficult to get something as easy as "water". Just water. If a restaurant serves tap water, you'll usually have the wonders of chlorine and whatever crap is in the city water. If you get bottled water, there's a very good chance that you'll be drinking salted water instead. Why would I want something to quench my thirst, that will just make me thirsty? Oh. To make it more profitable for the company. Why sell them (me) one bottle, when they can sell me 3 and still leave me thirsty. And I know a lot of people will cry "BS" on that. Check the labels.
Re:Dramatic effect and scientific precision
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
The counts of the "toxic" and "poison" references in the NYT article were a bit out of place. He does use the terms for dramatic effect, but the full lecture was very interesting an informative. Almost like he knows what he's talking about or something.:) Usually on long lectures like this, I lose interest after a while. This one, we watched the whole way through
You are absolutely right, it wouldn't even make a 1% dent in their profit, they'll just find a new way to exploit the market. Maybe they'll invent a new "holiday" that we are suppose to give (and eat) lots of candy. We already have a few.:)
Well, I could tell you everything I know, and have heard. But that's not much better than those who would feed you select information to brainwash you, and lead you into a cult.
Rather, I suggest researching it on your own. I will include some names (people, events, and items) and years as appropriate. Remember when searching, include Scientology to find more information. Some are relatively ambiguous terms without the "Scientology" keyword.
Lisa McPherson (1995), Elli Perkins (2003), Jeremy Perkins (2003) Terri Schiavo (2005), Kaja Ballo (2008), malpractice, false imprisonment, torture, forced abortions, child abuse, "The Brainwashing manual", Rehabilitation Project Force, Oxford Capacity Analysis (No relation to Oxford University), E-Meter, Audit, Thetan, Suppressive Person (SP), WOG, Xenu (Xemu),
And it wouldn't be complete without This video (timestamp 4:20 and 8:44), This video (timestamp: 2:36), and This video. But hey, he's just a brainwashed cult ^H^H^H^H organization member/spokesperson.
I should say though, that when I began reviewing information about them, I took what I had read as a few people had their tinfoil hats screwed on too tight. Turns out, they were right.
In knowing some Scientology, and examining what they've been willing to show me (as a recruitment tactic), and gleaning additional information through the wonders of social engineering, it can be said that there are many attributes which make it resemble a cult.... and that is said with all the care of knowing that they tend to sue, harass, threaten, physically assault, and sometimes "disappear" those who make statements contrary to their agenda. Hmmm, those would be more cult-ish attributes, wouldn't they?
And lets not forget the voice recognition, so it will understand when you start screaming "DO WHAT I FUCKING SAY YOU FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT!"
People who know me know that they really shouldn't suggest I try to do anything on those i[insert word] devices. If it takes 5 minutes to dial a phone number on a phone, or just as long to do what would have been less than 5 seconds of typing, you've just spent too much money on something that will just make you die of old age before you accomplish anything.
And... flamboyant swooshes of your hands should be left to homosexual people, who know how to do it right. Us straight people just can't flamboyantly swoosh our hands. No offense to homosexual people, many of you just swoosh better than heterosexual people.
Please clarify that. I'm not aware of any civil or criminal offenses that could be committed by that action. In no way does it threaten the agent nor their procedures. Now saying "don't touch my junk", and/or refusal to follow instructions of the agent can have civil or criminal results.
Are you extracting that assumption from your posterior orifice? Or do you just watch too much FoxNews?
Blind obedience is the idea. Sorry, I'm not blind nor obedient. But I do put up with many things to achieve a goal, such as getting from point A to point B via the fastest commercial carrier. Aircraft almost always beats car, bus, or train. I also sit through absolutely boring meetings at the request of other executives, and follow the company dress code (no shorts, and no heavy metal band T-shirts in meetings with customers. Damn, they ask for so much from me).
Sadly, I've seen the prejudices against being "over qualified" quite a bit.
I was out of work for a while. I had lots of interviews. Some of them asked me bluntly, "Are you kidding, you're way too qualified". My response was that I'd been out of work for (6 months to 1.5 years, depending on the interview), and anything is better than nothing. I was driving myself nuts trying to find things to do.
My girlfriend is going through it right now. 20 years in management scares away potential employers, when she's applied for everything from entry sales to mid management. Sometimes they'll say "sorry, you're over qualified". Sometimes they'll just comment on her work history as being impressive, and then pick a kid out of high school, since they'll obviously stay around when the job market gets better.
I've only been asked once to take an IQ test for a job. It was a web developer position. When I got there, the manager was "in a meeting". They had me go to the conference room for a few tests. I noticed at the bottom, L Ron Hubbard's name all over them. Literally. At the time, I noted the names of the tests. As I recall, there were 3. Two were personality tests. One was a pathetic excuse for an IQ test. I say pathetic as in, There was only one question I couldn't answer in 30 seconds or less. I saved it, and went back to answer it when I was done with the rest.
Since I had been abandon in the conference room by myself, and I was they were timed, I went back to the receptionist. I was done about an hour early. The manager had "just left", but they would be scheduling me for an interview in the next day or two. Really professional, I thought. Nope, it was time to review my test answers.
I did my own research on the test afterwards. If the personality tests show a strong will, or if your IQ is too high or low, you aren't a good candidate as an "employee". It, of course, is a recruiting tool for Scientology. Once they give you the job, they pressure you towards their faith (begrudgingly calling it such).
If you test with a strong will AND a high IQ, they are forbidden talking to you. Literally no contact at all. After about 3 days, I called to see if there was a plan to interview or if the position had been filled. They wouldn't answer my calls. I sent a couple emails. The first was asking about the position. After a week, I sent the second, just asking for my test scores. No response to either. Yippie, I'm blacklisted from being a Scientology. Someone with a high IQ and strong personality is virtually impossible to brainwash into a cult, and can in turn be a subversive power if they are brought in. Who knows how many I would have talked out of the cult if they had let me in the door.:)
So, ya, bastards for refusing me because of my IQ and personality. Good for me that I didn't have to deal with that BS.
In other news, they won't hire anyone who's too black, or too female, or... or...
Applying a standard as such across the board without legitimate reasons is completely wrong. There are some legitimate reasons. Hiring a quadriplegic, a blind man, or a deaf mute to patrol may not be quite the right choice. They could be considered for equivalent (pay and status) positions. Refusing people because they are too smart, too strong, or too... well... any favorable trait, is insane.
Or maybe we have it. Management scored too low on sanity tests.
Not by the DoD sticker on the laptop, and the obvious DoD markings on the top of the document. That's all I caught at a glance. I really didn't care. Worst case, someone misbehaves on the plane, and I'm in the seat by the only guy with a gun and badge. I'm ok with that.:) At least now I know there'll be 2 guys kicking the ass of anyone misbehaving. I'm not above smashing my laptop over the head of someone who wants to do something that may risk my life, or putting those well trained hand-to-hand combat techniques into use. I've flown a lot, and haven't needed to ever, which I'm even happier about. The worst I've had is kids around 4 or 5 years old playing peek-a-boo over the seat. That goes old after the first hour, but hey, when the flight is done, I never have to see them again.:)
Smugglers who complain, are resistive, or combative are the ones who get caught. The guy who can smile and say "no sir, nothing wrong here" with 50 kilos of heroin in the trunk of his car is the successful smuggler that you never know about.... and no, I don't have 50 kilos of heroin in the trunk of my car. I can't afford that kind of quantity.:)
Actually, I've had the pleasure of sitting by a few air marshals. It didn't come up in conversation, but when they're using a government issued computer, and looking at training photos, or reading documents that have a security clearance, it becomes more obvious. And ya, the sports coat and ankle holster are dead giveaways.
Hmmm.. Thinking about it, half the time I dress for business. Those trips, I'm getting off the plane and then to a meeting of some sort. When dressed like that, I'm treated very well and expedited through the line. t-shirt and jeans usually gets me a secondary screening.
I guess a crew cut and business dress clothes are a dead giveaway that I'm an agent of some sort.
I was doing some traveling with a coworker for a while. I started to play a game with him. It was "watch their behavior" game. Dress clothes? No problem. Casual clothes, problems. I only wore casual when we had plenty of time for the flight, as it'd add about 15 minutes for me at the checkpoint. Hey, for every minute they're harassing me, that's another minute they aren't harassing someone else. I can deal with verbal abuse, obtuse questioning, and a bit of molestation. If you close your eyes, it's like being at a massage parlor, except without the happy ending.
You know, soft moaning like you're enjoying the experience, and asking them to do redo particular parts works very well too. It's not a "complaint", but it'll weird them out enough to not want to touch you ever again.
I'm very straight, so it's hard to fake it, but apparently I do well enough.
Mmmm.. oh ya.. right there. do it again.. faster.. oohh... What are you doing after work, I fly back at 10pm..
You know, I hate it when I'm wrong. But..... Through the Blackberry Diagnostic Report, voila, a public IP. I also have ICMP enabled (it's the 6th line of the report), but this IP isn't pingable either. So they give us a public IP, and then push our web browsing through a proxy? I wonder how many middle-managements a day it takes to come up with some of these ideas.
[sarcasm]Anyways, they're only sitting on a/10. It's not a big waste of resources or anything. [/sarcasm]
I see the same thing on Sprint/Boost's CDMA network.
I can't find the IP of my device, but going out to the real world via http, I see the IP of a proxy, and a HTTP_VIA header, with an invalid hostname (no TLD), and it reports to be "Squid/2.7.STABLE7" (hey guys, time to upgrade).
NAT, I'm ok with. Proxying my connections, I don't like as much. Well, since I get gateway timeouts on a fairly regular basis, they need to work on their infrastructure a bit. NAT is much easier on the network than proxying, although I'm sure it saves them a few bucks on their uplink bandwidth.
The people whining about "oh my public IP" are the edge cases, or they're just repeating the same old BS. How many people really need public IPs? I'd bet if the major ISPs gave out public IPs on request (not even charging money), the majority of users wouldn't bother nor know the difference of having a private IP.
Too bad you don't remember the name of the movie.:)
Ya, I'm pretty sure if all I saw was hard ground below me, I'd be chosing the head first max velocity landing. It'd suck to just have massive internal bleeding and die after hours of laying there helplessly. So there's 5 seconds of thought, 2 minutes 55 seconds more of falling.
Actually, I've seen plenty of houses in Florida with stucco facades. On any that I've needed to cut through, I've always found the wire mesh. As I understand it, the mesh is there to give the stucco something to bind to. It can kind of stick to the blocks, but doesn't do it very well. It's nicer to have the stucco stay on, than for a ton of concrete to come falling off when the temperature or humidity changes.
I agree, most houses in Florida are cement block, I'm sure there's a stack of reasons, beginning at "it's cheaper". It's stronger, quieter, and more durable in hurricanes. The stucco facade is put on so you don't have to see the ugly lines in the blocks.
And (to discuss the original point), no I haven't noticed a decrease in cell, WiFi or other reception. I *have* seen signals blocked by sturdier things, like refrigerators and cars.
Slashdot Mirror
Lets see...
apostrophe â(TM) ' ...
dash â', â", â", â
ellipsis â¦,
guillemets  Â
quotation marks ( â â(TM), âoe â )
slash/stroke ( / )
And of course, I have to add enough text here to avoid the lameness filter, which said "Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters. " So if I were to write a few lines about the wonders of how Slashdot does not yet support UTF-8 (still), except on slashdot.jp, it should let me post this without problems. Of course, it will take a lot of text to that.
In the famous words of my high school french teacher, "repetez s'il vous plait" (without all the "special" characters)
And of course, I have to add enough text here to avoid the lameness filter, which said "Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters. " So if I were to write a few lines about the wonders of how Slashdot does not yet support UTF-8 (still), except on slashdot.jp, it should let me post this without problems. Of course, it will take a lot of text to that.
I'm pretty sure the duration of that one is "When hell freezes over" +100 years.
Yup, openness and transparency. That's the CIA's motto. "No, we don't know anything about that". If you can't trust them to tell everyone the whole truth, who can you trust?
There isn't one. Well, there used to be one, but it was removed when it was shown to be futile. Apparently there is a peer process that frequently has severe conflicts with it, and then the child processes are a nightmare.
Due to this, the man page was removed, and users with longterm experience usually suggest against ever using it. Failure to heed their warnings usually result in comments such as "man, I told you so".
The first bug report with the process dates back from approximately 4000 B.C.E., and is still marked as "pending". I expect it won't be resolved until shortly after DNF is released. :)
That explains why this company is becoming the worlds leading producer in drinking water.
Sounds like you either don't want to or haven't learn to play the game.
I'm far from an expert in the wonderful world of agriculture. I do know there are huge subsidies paid out to farmers. That is very hit and miss though. Some people make a fortune, and you're just a single farmer, or a small farm family, you probably don't.
I was curious one day about the guy who owned our office building. The building management complained to me (I just worked for one of the tenants) that the owner was "rich", but was too cheap to maintain the building properly. That ranged from plumbing that didn't work, to elevators that frequently got stuck, and alarm systems that would falsely trigger on a fairly regular basis. That man knows the system. He lives in an urban area, with the nearest farm land larger than 5 acres, about 50 miles away. From 2003 to 2005, he collected $3,217,158 in farm subsidies from the government. He's never worked a day in his life on a farm. That's enough information, if you want to Google around for more information on him, but you won't like what you find. Rich people make a fortune on plans that were *SUPPOSE* to help small farmers. Wouldn't a few hundred thousand in gov't subsidies help your farm? You'll have a hard time getting it, because rich non-farm people are collecting that money for you. They're also the same asses that shuffle their money around in such a way to make themselves look "poor" when tax time comes.
It's somewhat satisfying that when I searched for his name, a Feb 2011 news story mentioned that approximately 4,000 head of Bison were seized by the state from one of "his" ranches. The purpose of the ranches? To provide rich people a way to "hunt" them. Hunting isn't exactly the right term, since customers would be shuttled out by truck to were the Bison were feeding, so they could shoot at them.
The thrill of the hunt shouldn't be in the comfort of a luxury SUV.
I think the part that you missed is that modern society has learned to serve potatoes with something else, or in may cases a whole lot of something else.
I take a little butter with my baked potato. I get strange reactions in restaurants when I don't want to drench it in sour cream, cheese, bacon, chives, etc. It's a perfectly good food. Why do we have to screw it up so bad?
The same is with salads. I eat mine with no dressing. A plate of raw vegetables tastes great. Why do I have to drown it in something else. I've had to send salads back 2 or 3 times, because they don't quite get "no dressing". No, not house dressing. No, not oil and vinegar. No, just the salad, dammit.
The same has gone for my steaks. I like rare steak. Like, warm enough in the middle to kill off germs. I'll be asked several times if I want whatever topping. No, I don't want butter, corn syrup laced BBQ sauce, or anything else on it. Just meat, that I can cut and eat.
Adding onto perfectly healthy foods with so many unhealthy additives has become deeply ingrained in our society. No one eats just a potato, vegetables, or meat. Well, except for a few people like me. I ordered the food to taste the food, not whatever dressing someone else wanted on it.
I do drink a lot of soda, which I plan on resolving again. When I stopped drinking soda before, I lost weight, gained muscle, and felt better. One car accident and a year of rehab with prescription drug induced confusion helped guide me back to consumerism (and a lifetime of pain). While I wasn't drinking soda, I found it very difficult to get something as easy as "water". Just water. If a restaurant serves tap water, you'll usually have the wonders of chlorine and whatever crap is in the city water. If you get bottled water, there's a very good chance that you'll be drinking salted water instead. Why would I want something to quench my thirst, that will just make me thirsty? Oh. To make it more profitable for the company. Why sell them (me) one bottle, when they can sell me 3 and still leave me thirsty. And I know a lot of people will cry "BS" on that. Check the labels.
The counts of the "toxic" and "poison" references in the NYT article were a bit out of place. He does use the terms for dramatic effect, but the full lecture was very interesting an informative. Almost like he knows what he's talking about or something. :) Usually on long lectures like this, I lose interest after a while. This one, we watched the whole way through
You are absolutely right, it wouldn't even make a 1% dent in their profit, they'll just find a new way to exploit the market. Maybe they'll invent a new "holiday" that we are suppose to give (and eat) lots of candy. We already have a few. :)
Well, I could tell you everything I know, and have heard. But that's not much better than those who would feed you select information to brainwash you, and lead you into a cult.
Rather, I suggest researching it on your own. I will include some names (people, events, and items) and years as appropriate. Remember when searching, include Scientology to find more information. Some are relatively ambiguous terms without the "Scientology" keyword.
Lisa McPherson (1995), Elli Perkins (2003), Jeremy Perkins (2003) Terri Schiavo (2005), Kaja Ballo (2008), malpractice, false imprisonment, torture, forced abortions, child abuse, "The Brainwashing manual", Rehabilitation Project Force, Oxford Capacity Analysis (No relation to Oxford University), E-Meter, Audit, Thetan, Suppressive Person (SP), WOG, Xenu (Xemu),
And it wouldn't be complete without This video (timestamp 4:20 and 8:44), This video (timestamp: 2:36), and This video. But hey, he's just a brainwashed cult ^H^H^H^H organization member/spokesperson.
I'd agree on the Mafia-ish traits, if they weren't trying to recruit anyone that may be a "good fit" for their group.
I should say though, that when I began reviewing information about them, I took what I had read as a few people had their tinfoil hats screwed on too tight. Turns out, they were right.
In knowing some Scientology, and examining what they've been willing to show me (as a recruitment tactic), and gleaning additional information through the wonders of social engineering, it can be said that there are many attributes which make it resemble a cult. ... and that is said with all the care of knowing that they tend to sue, harass, threaten, physically assault, and sometimes "disappear" those who make statements contrary to their agenda. Hmmm, those would be more cult-ish attributes, wouldn't they?
And lets not forget the voice recognition, so it will understand when you start screaming "DO WHAT I FUCKING SAY YOU FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT!"
People who know me know that they really shouldn't suggest I try to do anything on those i[insert word] devices. If it takes 5 minutes to dial a phone number on a phone, or just as long to do what would have been less than 5 seconds of typing, you've just spent too much money on something that will just make you die of old age before you accomplish anything.
And... flamboyant swooshes of your hands should be left to homosexual people, who know how to do it right. Us straight people just can't flamboyantly swoosh our hands. No offense to homosexual people, many of you just swoosh better than heterosexual people.
Please clarify that. I'm not aware of any civil or criminal offenses that could be committed by that action. In no way does it threaten the agent nor their procedures. Now saying "don't touch my junk", and/or refusal to follow instructions of the agent can have civil or criminal results.
Are you extracting that assumption from your posterior orifice? Or do you just watch too much FoxNews?
Blind obedience is the idea. Sorry, I'm not blind nor obedient. But I do put up with many things to achieve a goal, such as getting from point A to point B via the fastest commercial carrier. Aircraft almost always beats car, bus, or train. I also sit through absolutely boring meetings at the request of other executives, and follow the company dress code (no shorts, and no heavy metal band T-shirts in meetings with customers. Damn, they ask for so much from me).
Sadly, I've seen the prejudices against being "over qualified" quite a bit.
I was out of work for a while. I had lots of interviews. Some of them asked me bluntly, "Are you kidding, you're way too qualified". My response was that I'd been out of work for (6 months to 1.5 years, depending on the interview), and anything is better than nothing. I was driving myself nuts trying to find things to do.
My girlfriend is going through it right now. 20 years in management scares away potential employers, when she's applied for everything from entry sales to mid management. Sometimes they'll say "sorry, you're over qualified". Sometimes they'll just comment on her work history as being impressive, and then pick a kid out of high school, since they'll obviously stay around when the job market gets better.
I've only been asked once to take an IQ test for a job. It was a web developer position. When I got there, the manager was "in a meeting". They had me go to the conference room for a few tests. I noticed at the bottom, L Ron Hubbard's name all over them. Literally. At the time, I noted the names of the tests. As I recall, there were 3. Two were personality tests. One was a pathetic excuse for an IQ test. I say pathetic as in, There was only one question I couldn't answer in 30 seconds or less. I saved it, and went back to answer it when I was done with the rest.
Since I had been abandon in the conference room by myself, and I was they were timed, I went back to the receptionist. I was done about an hour early. The manager had "just left", but they would be scheduling me for an interview in the next day or two. Really professional, I thought. Nope, it was time to review my test answers.
I did my own research on the test afterwards. If the personality tests show a strong will, or if your IQ is too high or low, you aren't a good candidate as an "employee". It, of course, is a recruiting tool for Scientology. Once they give you the job, they pressure you towards their faith (begrudgingly calling it such).
If you test with a strong will AND a high IQ, they are forbidden talking to you. Literally no contact at all. After about 3 days, I called to see if there was a plan to interview or if the position had been filled. They wouldn't answer my calls. I sent a couple emails. The first was asking about the position. After a week, I sent the second, just asking for my test scores. No response to either. Yippie, I'm blacklisted from being a Scientology. Someone with a high IQ and strong personality is virtually impossible to brainwash into a cult, and can in turn be a subversive power if they are brought in. Who knows how many I would have talked out of the cult if they had let me in the door. :)
So, ya, bastards for refusing me because of my IQ and personality. Good for me that I didn't have to deal with that BS.
In other news, they won't hire anyone who's too black, or too female, or ... or ...
Applying a standard as such across the board without legitimate reasons is completely wrong. There are some legitimate reasons. Hiring a quadriplegic, a blind man, or a deaf mute to patrol may not be quite the right choice. They could be considered for equivalent (pay and status) positions. Refusing people because they are too smart, too strong, or too ... well ... any favorable trait, is insane.
Or maybe we have it. Management scored too low on sanity tests.
Not by the DoD sticker on the laptop, and the obvious DoD markings on the top of the document. That's all I caught at a glance. I really didn't care. Worst case, someone misbehaves on the plane, and I'm in the seat by the only guy with a gun and badge. I'm ok with that. :) At least now I know there'll be 2 guys kicking the ass of anyone misbehaving. I'm not above smashing my laptop over the head of someone who wants to do something that may risk my life, or putting those well trained hand-to-hand combat techniques into use. I've flown a lot, and haven't needed to ever, which I'm even happier about. The worst I've had is kids around 4 or 5 years old playing peek-a-boo over the seat. That goes old after the first hour, but hey, when the flight is done, I never have to see them again. :)
Smugglers who complain, are resistive, or combative are the ones who get caught. The guy who can smile and say "no sir, nothing wrong here" with 50 kilos of heroin in the trunk of his car is the successful smuggler that you never know about. ... and no, I don't have 50 kilos of heroin in the trunk of my car. I can't afford that kind of quantity. :)
Actually, I've had the pleasure of sitting by a few air marshals. It didn't come up in conversation, but when they're using a government issued computer, and looking at training photos, or reading documents that have a security clearance, it becomes more obvious. And ya, the sports coat and ankle holster are dead giveaways.
Hmmm.. Thinking about it, half the time I dress for business. Those trips, I'm getting off the plane and then to a meeting of some sort. When dressed like that, I'm treated very well and expedited through the line. t-shirt and jeans usually gets me a secondary screening.
I guess a crew cut and business dress clothes are a dead giveaway that I'm an agent of some sort.
I was doing some traveling with a coworker for a while. I started to play a game with him. It was "watch their behavior" game. Dress clothes? No problem. Casual clothes, problems. I only wore casual when we had plenty of time for the flight, as it'd add about 15 minutes for me at the checkpoint. Hey, for every minute they're harassing me, that's another minute they aren't harassing someone else. I can deal with verbal abuse, obtuse questioning, and a bit of molestation. If you close your eyes, it's like being at a massage parlor, except without the happy ending.
You know, soft moaning like you're enjoying the experience, and asking them to do redo particular parts works very well too. It's not a "complaint", but it'll weird them out enough to not want to touch you ever again.
I'm very straight, so it's hard to fake it, but apparently I do well enough.
Mmmm.. oh ya.. right there. do it again.. faster.. oohh... What are you doing after work, I fly back at 10pm..
You know, I hate it when I'm wrong. But..... Through the Blackberry Diagnostic Report, voila, a public IP. I also have ICMP enabled (it's the 6th line of the report), but this IP isn't pingable either. So they give us a public IP, and then push our web browsing through a proxy? I wonder how many middle-managements a day it takes to come up with some of these ideas.
[sarcasm]Anyways, they're only sitting on a /10. It's not a big waste of resources or anything. [/sarcasm]
$whois 184.211.xxx.xxx
# The following results may also be obtained via:
# http://whois.arin.net/rest/nets;q=184.211.xxx.xxx?showDetails=true&showARIN=false
#
NetRange: 184.192.0.0 - 184.255.255.255
CIDR: 184.192.0.0/10
OriginAS:
NetName: SPRINT-WIRELESS
NetHandle: NET-184-192-0-0-1
Parent: NET-184-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Allocation
I see the same thing on Sprint/Boost's CDMA network.
I can't find the IP of my device, but going out to the real world via http, I see the IP of a proxy, and a HTTP_VIA header, with an invalid hostname (no TLD), and it reports to be "Squid/2.7.STABLE7" (hey guys, time to upgrade).
NAT, I'm ok with. Proxying my connections, I don't like as much. Well, since I get gateway timeouts on a fairly regular basis, they need to work on their infrastructure a bit. NAT is much easier on the network than proxying, although I'm sure it saves them a few bucks on their uplink bandwidth.
The people whining about "oh my public IP" are the edge cases, or they're just repeating the same old BS. How many people really need public IPs? I'd bet if the major ISPs gave out public IPs on request (not even charging money), the majority of users wouldn't bother nor know the difference of having a private IP.
Too bad you don't remember the name of the movie. :)
Ya, I'm pretty sure if all I saw was hard ground below me, I'd be chosing the head first max velocity landing. It'd suck to just have massive internal bleeding and die after hours of laying there helplessly. So there's 5 seconds of thought, 2 minutes 55 seconds more of falling.
Actually, I've seen plenty of houses in Florida with stucco facades. On any that I've needed to cut through, I've always found the wire mesh. As I understand it, the mesh is there to give the stucco something to bind to. It can kind of stick to the blocks, but doesn't do it very well. It's nicer to have the stucco stay on, than for a ton of concrete to come falling off when the temperature or humidity changes.
I agree, most houses in Florida are cement block, I'm sure there's a stack of reasons, beginning at "it's cheaper". It's stronger, quieter, and more durable in hurricanes. The stucco facade is put on so you don't have to see the ugly lines in the blocks.
And (to discuss the original point), no I haven't noticed a decrease in cell, WiFi or other reception. I *have* seen signals blocked by sturdier things, like refrigerators and cars.